Edmunds 1

Elizabeth Edmunds
Ms. Jennings
ENG-111-80
8 December 2014

Is It Constitutional To Convict Juveniles To The Death Penalty?

Imagine turning on the television, and every news channel is covering the same thing.
Twenty eight children dead due to a violent rampage that occurred in an elementary school in a
small town. The screen shows the suspect that has been taken into custody. It is the face of a
sixteen year old boy. Hes issued a statement already saying, I hate kids. It brought me such
happiness to watch them all die. America is in disbelief. How could a sixteen year old boy
commit such a crime? Imagine the eternal pain and nightmares the parents will have to endure
for the rest of their lives, while the killer of their child will most likely walk away as an
innocent child criminal, with unreasonable and unjustified punishment. While this is just a
made up scenario, there have been crimes committed by juveniles that have been just as
gruesome and terrifying. Criminals, particularly juveniles in these types of cases, should not be
convicted based on their age, but the magnitude of the crimes that they have committed.
In 1993, 17 year old Christopher Simmons kidnapped Shirley Crook, tied her up, and
threw her off a bridge into a river. Christophers case didnt reach a verdict until March 1st, 2005
when the Supreme Court reached a decision that prohibits the death penalty for juvenile killers
(Missouri Death Row). Prosecutors also said that Simmons had already planned the murder and

Edmunds 2

burglary of Shirley and told his two friends about his plan. During his discussion he assured his
friends that since he and them were all teenagers, they could get away with a crime like the one
he planned and did commit (Missouri Death Row). Automatically outlawing juveniles to the
death penalty when they have committed murder doesnt provide fairness and justice to the
families and loved ones of these victims. Juries cannot be considerate of the crimes or even the
offenders because the juvenile killers and cases are being grouped into one age category,
instead of being looked at individually. By letting juvenile killers be considered to the death
penalty, it could possibly deter juveniles from committing future crimes, and the existing cases
can be justified by being evaluated by their uniqueness and individuality. Crimes are never just
alike, and never will be.
The defense council made it a point to the jurors that other adolescents that are of the
same age of Christopher Simmonss are not allowed to drink, serve on jurors, or even see
certain movies... because legislature has already established that at that age, juveniles are not
responsible or mature enough to do so. (Melusky & Pesto 176) Maturity has nothing to do with
ones ability to end the life of another human being. The government may be able to control
minors when it comes to the age restrictions on movies, voting, or purchasing alcohol and
tobacco, but they cannot control a teens desire to plotting and going through with committing a
murder. To be realistic, nobody told Richard Simmons to plot the burglary and murder of Shirley
Cook. Nobody told 17 year old Steven Miles to stab his girlfriend Elizabeth Thomas to death,
dismember her body, wrap it in cling film and then clean up the crime scene afterwards in
January 2014 (ABC7 Chicago). Nobody told T.J Lane, also 17, to bring a gun to school and
murder three students while wounding three more in March of 2012 (Hoffer). To address more
disturbing details of T.J Lanes case, in his final hearing, he decided to wear a t-shirt with the

Edmunds 3

word killer written on it, while telling the victims and their families, The hand that pulled the
trigger that killed your sons now masturbates to the memoryF*** you all (Hoffer). Immature
of him to say? Yes. Unusual to be his only statement? Definitely. It was also cruel of him to say,
as well as cruel of all of these murderers to have done these things to these precious people.
Which brings me to the Eighth Amendment.
Nevertheless, the creation of the Eighth Amendment was aimed to bring assurance of
fairness to the outcomes of legally found guilty individuals. Simmonss case is what officially
made the Supreme Court rule out that sentencing juvenile offenders to death violated the U.S
Constitutions Eight Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. (Juvenile Death
Penalty). Making this law into effect and using the Eighth Amendment as an excuse is
completely contradictory. Is murdering someone not cruel or unusual punishment against an
innocent victim? The lives of these guilty and cruel individuals should not be without a second
thought spared because of their age, when the ones who were murdered never had a chance or
choice to live. While the age of these adolescent killers may seem unspeakable, they are by far
not innocent, and cannot be looked at as just a childlike mistake.
Ultimately, calling these criminals just a child is simply a mere act of ignorance to
distract the fact that they actually are not children. 53% of all the juvenile murderer offenders
were 17 at the time of their offenses, and the remaining vast majority (about 35%) were 16
years of age (National Organization). Legally every one of these offenders was found in a court
of by state law to be legally an adult (National Organization). These adolescents are not
children. It is common knowledge to know that life starts with childhood, continues into
adolescence, then adulthood. The twelve months between the ages of 17 and 18 cannot logically
deem what supporters and the Supreme Court like to call a child into an adult. Imagine if a

Edmunds 4

teen killed someone one day shy of their 18th birthday. It would not be reasonable to assume that
overnight that juvenile gained the knowledge and wisdom of an adult. Therefore, setting an age
on when juveniles can be considered to a death sentence is defective. Advocates against teens
being sentenced to the death penalty will also bring the unfinished development of adolescent
brains into argument.
Furthermore, the part of the brain that supporters use to argue with is known as the
frontal lobe. The frontal lobe of the brain is one of the last parts of the brain that fully matures,
and may not mature until the mid-20s (NJJN). It is also responsible for controlling impulses and
making decisions (Infobase Learning). With this being said, the Supreme Court used mostly this
information to create the law of not convicting juveniles to the death penalty. If this fact is so,
then the law that juvenile killers have be at least 18 when they commit that crime needs to be
readjusted to a later age, say 30. This also should apply to the drinking age, driving age, voting
age, and so on. These actions all require impulses and making mature decisions. According to the
National Juvenile Justice Network, teens can think just as rationally as an adult. Their
intellectual capabilities can be developed as adults; they are capable of making reasoned
decisions and often will make better decisions than adults (NJJN). If all frontal lobes developed
at the same rate, then there would be teenage killers everywhere (Teen Killers). Nevertheless, if a
teenager can commit the same severity of a crime as an adult, then their mental state should be
viewed as one as well. Regardless of the maturity rate of an adolescents brain, a killer is a killer.
In conclusion, if society wants to move forward with creating the world into a much safer
place to live, it is vital that we hold juveniles responsible for their actions and accept the death
penalty as a just and reasonable punishment for them when necessary. Doing so will possibly act
as a deterrent to our youth when it comes to committing heinous acts of violence and murder. It

Edmunds 5

would help do away with the adolescent mindset that since they are just teens, they could get
away with it. Teens, even toddlers, know that killing anything is wrong, and using a juveniles
brain development to excuse murder is a redundant statement. As society increasingly continues
to depict violence and murder more within video games, television, and cinema, our youth will
only grow to be more desensitized to the actual severity and horror of it. It is inevitable that
violence and murder will only increase as the years go by as they do and will not ever fear the
crime itself, the law, or the punishments that we have now.

Edmunds 6

Works Cited

Juvenile Death Penalty. Issues & Controversies. Infobase Learning, 21 Jan. 2005. Web. 8 Dec.
2014.
<http://icof.infobaselearning.com.ezproxy.vccs.edu:2048/recurl.aspx?wid=98267&ID=16
50>.

"Using Adolescent Brain Research To Inform Policy." NJJN. National Juvenile Justice Network,
1 Sept. 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2014. <http://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/BrainDevelopment-Policy-Paper_Updated_FINAL-9-27-12.pdf>.

"Myths / Facts." National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Murderers. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.
<http://www.teenkillers.org/index.php/myths-about-the-juvenile-life-sentence/>.

Melusky, Keith A. Pesto. The Death Penalty: Documents Decoded. Santa Joseph A, and
Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2014. Internet resource

"Missouri Death Row." Missouri Death Row. Learfield Communications, 11 Dec. 2008. Web. 14
Dec. 2014. <http://missourideathrow.com/2008/12/state-of-missouri-v-christophersimmons/>.

Roberts, Joel. "Court Ends Juvenile Death Penalty." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, 1 Mar. 2005.
Web. 14 Dec. 2014. <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/court-ends-juvenile-deathpenalty/>.

Hoffer, Steven. "T.J. Lane Life Sentence: Chardon High School Shooter Appears In Court
Wearing 'KILLER' T-Shirt." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 19 Mar.
2013. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/19/tj-lanesentenced-to-life-chardon_n_2907540.html>.

"British Teen Obsessed with TV's 'Dexter' Sentenced to 25 Years after Stabbing and
Dismembering Girlfriend." ABC7 Chicago. 3 Oct. 2014. Web. 14 Dec. 2014.
<http://abc7chicago.com/news/british-teen-sentenced-to-prison-for-dexter-like-murderof-his-girlfriend/335356/>.